History of Hadith Compilation by Muhammad Ali Mahdavirad (review)

Much has been said about the ‘scientific’ methods of modern historiography, and the so-called ‘revolution’ in historiography by historians like Leopold Ranke in the nineteenth century. The assumption was that modern historiography was more reliable because of its methodological use of archives and documents, whereas non-modern historians lacked the ‘scientific methodology’ and thus did not necessarily reflect reality as it was. The Islamic science of Hadith, with its strict and standard methodology, revokes that assumption. ‘History of Hadith Compilation’ by Muhammad Ali Mahdavirad, although with a different aim in its original Persian version, is undoubtedly one of the most useful books that one may find in English.

The book is neatly organised. It starts from the basics, i.e. the linguistic meaning of hadith. It defines it as ‘something exists, that did not exist before’, something new, and in general what refers to all kinds of speech. One could argue, as the author explains according to Al-Māmqānī, that ‘hadith’ could be understood as ‘modern’ or ‘modern speech’. In other words, hadith is a kind of speech whose ‘ contents are repeated afresh’. (p.7) This is the general meaning of hadith.

Hadith, as the subject of this book, has a technical meaning in the Islamic Sciences. For short, hadith means any ‘report’ from God’s Messenger, Imams, Companions, Successors or the like. So in this regard hadith is synonymous with ‘khabar’ (report). As a technical difference, according to some Sunni scholars, hadith is what was narrated from the Prophet himself and khabar is something from others, like his Companions. Shi‘a scholars on other hand, extend the scope of hadith to anything narrated from an ‘Infallible’ according to scholars like Shaykh al-Bahāʾī and Al-Mīrzā al-Qummī. As for the most well-known definition of hadith, Shi‘a scholars mostly agree that hadith is ‘whatever is related of the words, deeds, or tacit approvals of an Infallible.’

The author then goes on to explain the different technical terms, which are crucial for understanding the rest of the book. They include ‘khabar’ (report) and ‘athar’ (trace) which for Sunni scholars means something that is narrated from a Companion. Here the author has made an admirable effort to explain important technical terms and sometimes their slightly different meanings in Shi‘a and Sunni schools.

In the following chapter, Mahdavirad deals with the question of ‘writing hadith’ and how hadith or Prophet’s Sunnah (practice) reached later generations. According to Sunni scholars, writing and recording hadith did not happen until the first century. In fact the first Caliph who decreed writing down the hadith was ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz. He gave the edict on the last year of his life in 101 AH. Some believe that he did not to see it materialise and the actual writing began some years later.

Since there are disputes amongst Muslim scholars on whether it is permissible to write down the hadith or Prophet’s Sunnah, the author has gathered those different views. For the most commonly narrated hadith on disapproving their writing, he mentions a hadith narrated by Abu Saʿīd al-Khudrī. He says that the Prophet said: ‘Do not write down anything from me except the Qurʾan. Whoever has ever written from me that is other than the Qurʾan must erase it.’ The author then scrutinises this hadith and its ‘chain of transmission’. He then concludes that this hadith is not a reliable one and contradicts the Prophet’s deed. For an ordinary reader, familiar with basic principles of logic, it sounds a bit strange to ‘narrate a hadith’ just in order to prove that it is not permissible to write down a hadith!

After concluding that the Prophet was contrary to the aforementioned views, and that he actually encouraged writing down his words and deeds, the author defines two major formats of written hadith: ‘ṣaḥīfah’ (scroll) and ‘nuskhah’ (manuscript). He...